What has JK Rowling said or done that’s transphobic

That's my point. You don't even has as much evidence as that.

Just a whole chain of supposition. The phenomenon of a phantom hand exists therefore we must conclude trans people perceive themselves as a different sex to their sex body sex in handwavy ways therefore we must as far as possible behave as if we also believe that is their sex regardless of the external consequences that creates for other peope especially women.

I don't understand what you mean? Nothing I have argued on this thread rests on the proof of a screenshot of a tweet .

I don't understand what you mean? Nothing I have argued on this thread rests on the proof of a screenshot of a tweet .

Nope, not at all. The problem with this is that it suggests trans men should now all use women’s bathrooms and changing rooms. Trans men look like men. So what’s to stop an actual male wandering in and claiming ‘oh you can’t stop me, I’m a trans man!’ - it’s a stupid rule that in practice just makes no sense.

As others have said, if a man wants to attack a woman he’ll do it without bothering to put on a dress first.

No. Why?

I don’t think there is any sound logic or good evidence to support the idea that excluding all trans women from women’s toilets would improve women’s dignity, privacy or safety.

I’m not going to be dragged into a completely separate argument about sexual offending statistics.

Make your mind up, @Lacksie.

you're having to try to pretend that you were always saying what we've been saying all along

Absolutely not, I can't recall a single contribution that you have made to this thread that I agree with.

I think decisions about where to place prisoners should be made on the basis of an individual risk assessment, taking into account the safety, privacy and wellbeing of the prisoner themselves as well as the safety, privacy and wellbeing of the wider prison population

More evidence though than there being any connection whatsoever between what a trans person claims to feel and the reality of existing in the world as the opposite sex. Yet you feel entirely comfortable it should make sense to use the same language and provisions based simply on this self reported perception.

Double standards.

I’m not going to be dragged into a completely separate argument about sexual offending statistics. Even if I took your claims at face value (I don't), they arent relevant to the point I was making.

My argument was simply that being trans does not logically require someone to be delusional or mentally ill, and that describing a person’s sense of themselves as “the brain telling them something false” is an oversimplified way of talking about cognition.

I certainly haven’t claimed that trans people have “female brains”. And repeatedly demanding that I explain sexual offending rates is asking me to defend a claim I didn’t make.

If you want to respond to what I actually said, that’s fine. I’m not going to keep following unrelated tangents.

I think this is a much more legitimate question

...which is to say, you've had your arse handed to you by so many people in this thread that you're having to try to pretend that you were always saying what we've been saying all along.

What I object to is the framing of trans women as inherently deluded

If they're not deluded, then they really have no excuse for demanding access to women's spaces.

I don’t think there is any sound logic or good evidence to support the idea that excluding all trans women from women’s toilets would improve women’s dignity, privacy or safety.

Then you're being wilfully ignorant.

Recognising that trans identity is real does not settle questions about language, toilets, prisons, etc.

Recognising that people with mental health issues are deluded does not settle questions about language, toilets, prisons, etc. So why are you so resistant to recognising this?

I think decisions about where to place prisoners should be made on the basis of an individual risk assessment, taking into account the safety, privacy and wellbeing of the prisoner themselves as well as the safety, privacy and wellbeing of the wider prison population

There is no double standard.

An unverified screenshot of a single tweet is nowhere near sufficient evidence to establish that an individual is delusional. IW’s remark could have been rhetorical, sarcastic, metaphorical, said in frustration, or simply badly worded — we do not know what she meant. The fact that the tweet is no longer on her account means that, if the screenshot is genuine, the tweet was subsequently deleted.

And no, one unverified, contextless, remark by one individual is not remotely a sound basis on which to construct a wider argument about trans people as a group. That is not a high evidential bar; it is a very basic one.

I think this is a much more legitimate question, because it moves away from “are trans people deluded (lying, pretending, etc. etc.?)” and onto the actual policy issue: how do we accommodate trans people while also protecting privacy, dignity, safety and sex-segregated settings?

I don’t think recognising trans women as women linguistically, socially or legally requires us to say that birth sex or reproductive anatomy must become irrelevant in every context. It is perfectly possible to be inclusive of trans people while also acknowledging that birth sex and anatomy can matter too. I also don’t think “everyone who says they are a woman must therefore be admitted everywhere women are” is the only possible model. Rules can take account of behaviour, safeguarding, privacy, medical transition, individual risk assessment or the particular purpose of the space.

What I object to is the framing of trans women as inherently deluded, mentally ill, dishonest or predatory, and the idea that their identity is therefore illegitimate and should be disregarded everywhere. I also think policy is moving in a very irrational and troubling direction. I don’t think there is any sound logic or good evidence to support the idea that excluding all trans women from women’s toilets would improve women’s dignity, privacy or safety.

Recognising that trans identity is real does not settle questions about language, toilets, prisons, etc. Those are separate conversations and I think they should be answered on evidence about actual risks and harms rather than by starting from the assumption that trans people are lying, deluded or illegitimate.

Do you have two accounts?

Nope, not at all. The problem with this is that it suggests trans men should now all use women’s bathrooms and changing rooms. Trans men look like men. So what’s to stop an actual male wandering in and claiming ‘oh you can’t stop me, I’m a trans man!’ - it’s a stupid rule that in practice just makes no sense.

As others have said, if a man wants to attack a woman he’ll do it without bothering to put on a dress first.

I think decisions about where to place prisoners should be made on the basis of an individual risk assessment, taking into account the safety, privacy and wellbeing of the prisoner themselves as well as the safety, privacy and wellbeing of the wider prison population

Nope, not at all. The problem with this is that it suggests trans men should now all use women’s bathrooms and changing rooms. Trans men look like men. So what’s to stop an actual male wandering in and claiming ‘oh you can’t stop me, I’m a trans man!’ - it’s a stupid rule that in practice just makes no sense.

As others have said, if a man wants to attack a woman he’ll do it without bothering to put on a dress first.

Do you think transmen should be in men's prisons?

It's evidence that IW thinks he has a cervix. He's also previously claimed to be a cis woman.

Personally I don't think he's deluded, I think he's ignorant and arrogant. He doesn't know what a cervix is, he doesn't know what being female is really like, but on his arrogance he assumes he does.

But IW isn't the point here. Your double standards are.

Same for the claims being made about brains 😂

All I have to hand is an infographic (for use outside of forums in the real world for standard peaking of men with daughters, surprisingly easy because they know how men think)

You wouldn't accept that, and i really can't be arsed to go looking for peer reviewed stuff right now. You're just a post on a forum

The thread will lock soon, you won't look at anything I post in good faith, it's a waste of my time.

I use forums for entertainment and this has been a blast 😂

JKR stands for women's rights, i admire her, she is articulate and hs put up with horrendous behaviour from the "be nice" crowd.
She is not transphobic.
I can't wait for Hogwarts 2. I hope she uses the money to open another refuge.

I certainly would not take one tweet - later deleted - at face value and evidence JKR is transphobic, no. absolutely I would not not.

If she had left it with the original tweet that started the whole thing - the word for people who menstruate - whoman - that famous one - and then immediately deleted it, I certainly wouldn't be here saying I believe her to be transphobic. What makes me believe JKR is transphobic, is her consistent, persistent statements and behaviour over many many years, of which there is an abundance of direct evidence which reveal views as per my first post on this thread.

Nope, not at all. The problem with this is that it suggests trans men should now all use women’s bathrooms and changing rooms. Trans men look like men. So what’s to stop an actual male wandering in and claiming ‘oh you can’t stop me, I’m a trans man!’ - it’s a stupid rule that in practice just makes no sense.

As others have said, if a man wants to attack a woman he’ll do it without bothering to put on a dress first.

It's very telling how much evidence you require, and how quick you are to suggest alternative explanations, for facts that don't fit your narrative compared to your absolute confidence in the veracity of trans people's subjective "recognitions" existing in their own right and your absolute rejection of alternative explanations that fit the observed facts equally well.

How much evidence I require? You think pointing out that an unverified screenshot of a single tweet, without context, cannot reasonably be relied upon as evidence that an individual is delusional — let alone as the basis for a wider argument about trans people as a group — demonstrates an excessive standard of evidence??